Hi Jim, Currently, there isn't a way to differentiate between instance/schema parsing errors. Are you interested in per error basis, or just to know whether the parser has encountered any errors during parsing the schema.
Here are some suggestions: 1. Modify the parser to register an additional error handler that is used by schema traversal to report errors. 2. Add a method to the parser to inquire whether any errors were encountered during parsing a schema. Comments/suggestions are welcome. Khaled "Murphy, James" wrote: > Report - Apologies for the repost but I'm kinda in a bind here. > Jim > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Murphy, James [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 4:39 PM > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: Schema error vs. Instance error? > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > I am parsing an instance with an associated schema using > > DOMParser. I am trying to differentiate between errors > > parsing the schema and errors parsing the instance. > > Currently I can't tell in the call to error(). This is all > > so I know when I can reuse grammar in the parser. Obviously > > if I fail to parse the schema I don't want to reuse the grammar. > > > > I was looking atTraverseSchema::reportSchemError but I'm not > > sure how to hook into it. It seems kinda deep. I also can't > > seem to hook the XMLScanner's Error reporter since the > > DOMParser keeps it under wraps. > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > Jim > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
